Ballot Initiative to End NR Big Game Hunting?
- Thread starter BenInMT
- Start date
BenInMT
Well-known member
Ok let’s just keep fighting extremism with rational thought that has gotten us so far.
duckhunt
Well-known member
Is this thread real or should it be in the joke thread?
It’s a valid point something needs to change, to make things better it would take a change in season structures. Let’s see how popular that is. Probably about as popular as ending nonresident hunting.
Write it up and see how many signatures you get.
noharleyyet
Well-known member
So much for Kumbaya Day...
duckhunt
Well-known member
I'm not into the outfitter and landowner tags but all of the other nonresidents bring big money into the local economy.
huntandfly
Well-known member
It’s clearly a joke, he has probably just been constantly giggling for the last 25 minutes
I think this is a little extreme, but maybe just do away with the NR big game hunting.
Rumor has it Montana will soon be loaded with ring-necked pheasants and we will be the new go-to state for ditch parrots. Already talk about getting rid of meadowlark and replacing with the pheasant for our state bird.
Sorry about your luck SD, new game in town. Little pay back for not letting me hunt elk down there.
Rumor has it Montana will soon be loaded with ring-necked pheasants and we will be the new go-to state for ditch parrots. Already talk about getting rid of meadowlark and replacing with the pheasant for our state bird.
Sorry about your luck SD, new game in town. Little pay back for not letting me hunt elk down there.
Ridicous idea but financially it could work. Lawyers, special interest groups and politicians set wildlife policy in montana anyways so to make budget it would allow you to fire all your biologists and science based professionals and never miss a beat screwing up opportunity. Your not using the data and research input anyways, wasnt quote something like "we need to try something new, what we been doing aint working"
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
I’m not sure the exact numbers for MT but for CO NR tags bring in 10x the dollars that resident tags do, and the agency is mostly funded by tag sales. I imagine that Montana is similar though maybe not as extreme.
I think you’re like taking about $20MM in license revenue, that’s more than some boat launches.
Nameless Range
Well-known member
Though I don't think Ben's idea is a good one, I think the flaming he is receiving here is largely a part of the fact that this forum is chiefly made up of people who, at times, find themselves as nonresident hunters.
Most resident hunters pretty much never find themselves as a nonresident hunter, and most don't give two shits about nonresidents and in fact see them as a cancer upon their hunting. I'm not saying such an initiative would pass to be clear, and I am not saying it is a good idea.
If we talk about the economics of hunting, and not the financial economics that funds fish and game agencies or the Bullshit Mac Menard spews about small communities going under if outfitters don't have their tags - but rather, the very complicated supply and demand of available tags versus those who want them - I could imagine such a "Resident First" campaign being one with legs, albeit tiny ones that run out of steam and waste money and social capital.
Though it doesn't have much to do with Ben's proposal necessarily, I can say for myself that I care far less about nonresidents than I do residents, when it comes to tag allocation and who wildlife should be managed for. I'll gladly pay more for my licenses, whether to fund the agency in a more equitable way, or so that my nonresident hunting friends don't have to be fleeced, and for either reason, am aware that I am in the minority.
Most resident hunters pretty much never find themselves as a nonresident hunter, and most don't give two shits about nonresidents and in fact see them as a cancer upon their hunting. I'm not saying such an initiative would pass to be clear, and I am not saying it is a good idea.
If we talk about the economics of hunting, and not the financial economics that funds fish and game agencies or the Bullshit Mac Menard spews about small communities going under if outfitters don't have their tags - but rather, the very complicated supply and demand of available tags versus those who want them - I could imagine such a "Resident First" campaign being one with legs, albeit tiny ones that run out of steam and waste money and social capital.
Though it doesn't have much to do with Ben's proposal necessarily, I can say for myself that I care far less about nonresidents than I do residents, when it comes to tag allocation and who wildlife should be managed for. I'll gladly pay more for my licenses, whether to fund the agency in a more equitable way, or so that my nonresident hunting friends don't have to be fleeced, and for either reason, am aware that I am in the minority.
As well you should. No beef with that whatsoever. If NR hunters were truly the problem, I’d support it 110%.
I flamed him because
1) he lacks the comprehension of FWP funding and how it interfaces with state taxes
2) he doubled down on that by referencing boat check stations
3) eliminating NR hunting isn’t going to solve the greater underlying issues
Nameless Range
Well-known member
That's fair. The good news is, the vacancy savings that FWP is accruing by making employees so miserable that they are jumping ship like women and children on the Titanic will be enough to fund a boat launch for every man, woman, and child in Montana.
antlerradar
Well-known member
And the extremist you are referring to would be emboldened when this ballot initiative went down in flames.
BenInMT
Well-known member
It would be hilarious to see MOGA and the board of outfitters put a bunch of resources towards preventing the bill from passing. There is a heightened disdain for non residents right now and I think a lot of you non residents have no clue how far this could go.
If Montana didn’t have the season structure it does most of these complaints wouldn’t be an issue. I dread November by far the worst month of the year for a Montana native.
If Montana residents think the issues facing us are solved by showing disdain for non-resident hunters, I would opine that those folks have not spent much time in Helena during a legislative session or they have never publicly proposed changes to our mule deer seasons and been lit up by fellow resident hunters who feel it is their residential right to continue what is mostly a rifled assault on a treasured native species.
If Montanans want to focus on non-resident hunters as the source of our problems, expect more frustration, not less.
I just can't understand the mindset of this. mtmuley
Montana residents would be crying when their tags and licenses go up in price dramatically to make up for the loss of non-res $$.
Similar threads
